ArticlePediatric surgery international2017
Comparison of outcomes of thoracoscopic primary repair of gross type C esophageal atresia performed by qualified and non-qualified surgeons.
Article in Pediatric surgery international, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The application of stay sutures in thoracoscopic esophageal repair for Type C esophageal atresia.Pediatric surgery international · 2025Trial
- Young pediatric surgeons without endoscopic surgical skill qualification safely perform advanced endoscopic surgery under the supervision of expert qualified surgeons.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Risk factors for postoperative anastomotic leakage after repair of esophageal atresia: a retrospective nationwide database study.Surgery today · 2023Article
- Impact of congenital heart disease on outcomes after primary repair of esophageal atresia: a retrospective observational study using a nationwide database in Japan.Pediatric surgery international · 2019Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAlthough thoracoscopic repair of esophageal atresia has become widespread, most studies are based on operations performed by expert surgeons. Therefore, the outcomes of operations performed by non-expert surgeons are not well known. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes based on operator skill level.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed the demographics and outcomes of patients with Gross type C esophageal atresia, who underwent primary thoracoscopic repair at our hospital between January 2014 and August 2016. Outcomes of surgeries performed by qualified surgeons, as determined by the Japanese Society for Endoscopic Surgery were compared with those of non-qualified surgeons. All operations were performed by or under the supervision of one qualified surgeon.
resultsNine operations were performed by qualified surgeons and six operations by non-qualified surgeons with >10 years of experience in surgery. None of the patients developed anastomotic leakage or recurrent tracheoesophageal fistula. However, the operative time and rate of stricture formation at the beginning of the weaning period were significantly higher in the latter group (P = 0.008 and 0.044).
conclusionsAlthough supervision of experts would improve results in thoracoscopic repair of esophageal atresia, the results indicate that good skill is necessary to avoid anastomotic stricture.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28801747What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.